Monday 17 September 2018

Occupations of the Poor

I've just finished reading Himmelfarb's The Idea of Poverty: England in the Early Industrial Age. It's a great book that I would recommend to anybody, but a section on the anthropology of Victorian-era poverty, drawing heavily on London Labour and the London Poor, a collection of columns by the journalist Peter Mayhew, published in the 1840s, is particularly fascinating. I've got that book on order and will read and report back, but here are some of the contents cited by Himmelfarb; they are some of the "occupations" of the 19th century London poor - all of them very usable for a game set in Bastion, Sigil, or other pseudo-Victorian megalopolis:

Child-strippers - "Old debauched drunken hags who watch their opportunity to accost children passing in the street, tidily dressed with good boots and clothes" - their aim being to steal and sell those childrens' clothes, and ideally also their hair.

River-finders - boatsmen who would sail up and down the Thames, "hauling out the flotsam of wood which might be used for firewood or a baby's cradle, or the occasional corpse which could be turned in for a reward after the pockets had been picked"; they were apparently a hereditary class.

Street sellers of animals - "each with his own specialty (stolen dogs, birds painted to resemble exotic species, squirrels, rabbits, goldfish, tortoises, snails, worms, frogs, snakes, hedgehogs)."

Bone-grubbers - people who searched the streets for bones to grind for manure.

Pure-finders - people who gathered dog shit, to sell to tanners for purifying leather.

Sewer-men - those who entered sewers in search of coins, scraps of metal, bits of jewelry, rope or bones to sell on; they often had higher earnings than the best paid artisans and believed sewer fumes to have therapeutic qualities.

Mud-larks - "Children and old women whose job it was to dredge the mud left by the receding tide. Wading and groping in the mud for pieces of coal, chips of wood, scraps of metal, and bones, they passed and repassed each other without speaking, their eyes fixed upon the ground, their bodies bent over, clad in tattered, befouled rags, 'stiffened up like boards with dirt of every possible description.'"

Sifters - "half buried in mounds of cinders and ashes, sieving through them to separate the fine dust from the coarse both from other varieties of refuse. Garbed in heavy leather aprons, they wielded their sieves so violently that the noise of the sieves striking the aprons was like the sound of tenor drums."


10 comments:

  1. Mayhew is a goldmine. I think you'll enjoy it a lot. And, yes, it's a brilliant resource for populating fantasy city-scapes, most of which are actually just Victorian London in disguise...

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that reading about this is useful even for a more fantasy setting, because it makes us thing about marginal occupations, and how they could be filled in - either someone doing a mundane job (mudlarking) in a fantastic way (using summoned worms to burrow for hard thing?), doing a mundane job for a fantastic reason (the bone-grubbers sell their findings to necromancers who assemble bone-golems), or perhaps doing fantastic things in a mudane manner (catching fairies with big net?)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you could summon worms surely you could just sell (or eat) those. Having access to an inexhaustible resource is a great cure for poverty!

      Delete
    2. Yes, lots of cool ideas there!

      Delete
  3. That's some quality content. Very creepy too.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Haha-- I just tried to find out more about Mayhew book by googling. *Peter* Mayhew (as you have above) is Chewbacca. The journalist you are reading is *Henry* Mayhew. Probably worth a correction!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oops. Must have subconsciously written it because of the Chewbacca connection. I'll leave it for posterity. Although Chewbacca as an anthropologist in 19th century London - there's a high concept novel waiting to be written.

      Delete
  5. Mahew's London Labor is pretty much written as a bestiary.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is a brilliant find which I can only assume is a result of judicious wide reading. I have ordered the oxford paperback which I hope gives a good account of the original.

    More of this. Less of the random tables. My vote.

    ReplyDelete